Hypnosis has a “very real” effect that can be picked up on brain scans, say Hull University researchers. An imaging study of hypnotised participants showed decreased activity in the parts of the brain linked with daydreaming or letting the mind wander.
The same brain patterns were absent in people who had the tests but who were not susceptible to being hypnotised. One psychologist said the study backed the theory that hypnosis “primes” the brain to be open to suggestion.
BBC (thanks, Tammy)
"
Saw this yesterday – very interesting indeed
Wow. Thats solid god. Is there a link to the actual research publishings related to this?
- All I know it was carried out by this guy who has a crazy looking website: http://www.mheap.com/ – Phillis
if regionalised brain activity represents different states of awareness and different conscious processes, it stands to reason that hypnosis would appear to change the functioning of the brain. If I look at an apple a region of the brain lights up. The region of the brain that lights up can also be triggered by just thinking about an apple (with some minor differences, for example in the visual cortex). The personal subjective experience (seen apple, thought about apple) are reflected in the FMRI scans. Hypnosis is definitely a real experience, whether it is a subset of normal consciousness or a completely different state. It stands to reason that this would be seen in the scans. If, however, the brain was active in a totally novel way, then the ‘special state’ theorists would have some evidence of its uniqueness. Very interesting…
This is interesting. I do adult stage hypnosis/magic shows from time to time.
)
(And Derren, if you are reading this, you’ll be happy to know that I follow your points outlined in your book to the letter, and further, I have never ever done anything embarrassing to the participants. Just all pleasure.
So I find this is incredibly interesting, but it makes me think: are the scans the same or similar to someone watching a movie or an advertisement?
And they did/do doubt that? It’s not about having people do stupid things .. but the state in which you speak from another level than you normally do. Where you use your brain different. Where you are in different control of your brain. Can be done all by yourself, no need for an hypnotherapist, although some say input from the outside may make you quit smoking or such faster. Depends on what type of person you are I guess.
Lots of ways to get into that state. You might not even recognize it as a rare state (and therefor you might say: “it did not work” ). It may go under other names as well ……so not only by the term hypnosis.
I am not a hypnotist, neuroscientist or expert of any sort. I have read several books on hypnosis, including DB’s book ‘Tricks of the Mind’. Hypnosis is completely fascinating to me. I am a trained nurse and i also studied the psychology of language for my first degree so i am not a complete novice. When i said ‘hypnosis is definitely a real experience’ I meant that many people seem to believe themselves to be having a real experience (whether or not they are deluding themselves or just lying). I am reminded of the use of antidepressants – it has become received wisdom that depression is caused by low serotonin when no study has ever found this to be the case. The mind is a reflection of brain activity and vice versa. It must be hard to seperate the cause from the effect.
Isha, the lead author (Dr Will McGeown) is a researcher/lecturer from the University of Hull, where I’m studying as a postgraduate. He’s a really nice fellow and I’m glad that his work has received this attention. Hull’s not as fashionable as some universities, but our Psychology department has really raised its game in the last few years or so and there’s some top-quality research being produced.
Yet another overenthusiastic media release about a study done by an ‘altered state’ theorist supposedly ‘proving’ hypnosis. It seems that every few years such a badly constructed study comes out, and these kinds of claims are made.
You didn’t post the most important part of the article which was the end, where it says that Dr Michal Heap has said that:
‘But he said the small study, which needed repeating in other populations, did not prove that people being hypnotised were in an actual “trance”.’
So again, this study has shown nothing that is not already known, and reflects only what the experimenter was looking to see. Be clear, if there is no hypnotic tracne, then ‘hypnosis’ does not exist- it is merely suggestion. This is what non-state theorists have been saying for years, and this study does not contradict this.
So lets look at what the study is really showing. First up he divides the participants into “highly suggestable” and “less suggestable”. What does this mean? it means people who are better at using their imagination when given suggestions and having a more ‘vivid’ imagination of them, and people who are less good at doing that. So of course we would expect to find differences in their brain activity, which is what the study has shown.
So the study has shown that people more responsive to suggestion (referred to as more succeptable to being ‘hypnotized’) have slightly different brain activity than those less responsive to suggestion. This is not surprising, and does not ‘prove’ hypnosis or any kind of ‘trance’ is real. It only demonstartes that results such as this do not mean much outside of how they are interpreted.